The critical flaw in most sales tech is its failure to correlate rep behavior with performance outcomes like quota attainment. The real value is unlocked not just by knowing what reps do, but by connecting those actions to who is succeeding, thus identifying true winning behaviors and separating A-players from C-players.

Don't hold elite performers to the same activity metrics as the rest of the team. Instead, grant them autonomy while explicitly stating they are not exempt from being a team player. This builds trust and respect, allowing them to focus on results without undermining team morale.

Accountability isn't just for underperformers. By helping top reps analyze and understand the specific actions driving their success, you can help them systematize their process and scale their performance, rather than letting them merely coast on hitting their existing quota.

Industry metrics like needing 18 touches or a 4x pipeline are often symptoms of a problem, not goals. Instead of blindly increasing activity, leaders should investigate the root cause. High numbers usually indicate ineffective messaging or poor qualification, not a lack of effort.

Effective coaching follows a three-step process: Identify a metric-based performance gap, validate the specific rep behaviors causing it, and then co-create a coaching plan focused on improving those behaviors, not just the lagging metric.

Instead of a generic strategy overhaul, leaders should first diagnose the root cause. If the sales team is active but results are poor, it's an execution or skill issue needing coaching. If activity itself is low, it's a focus and prioritization problem requiring a reset.

Don't use static KPIs. Every month, analyze the activity metrics of reps who successfully hit quota. Use this data to set the new KPIs for the entire team for the upcoming month. This ensures targets are based on proven success and increases team buy-in.

Viewing quota as a lagging indicator, Figma's CRO warns that managing to the number creates "lazy leadership." Performance management should instead center on a detailed framework of inputs: behaviors (e.g., collaboration) and competencies (e.g., discovery skills), giving a real-time view of a rep's effectiveness.

Instead of just celebrating top reps, analyze their data to find *why* they succeed. If several reps get engagement at a specific step in a cadence, dive deep to understand their tactic, and then replicate that learning across the whole team. This creates a continuous improvement loop.